Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 May 2018 11:25:35 +1000 (AEST) | From | Finn Thain <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net] macmace: Set platform device coherent_dma_mask |
| |
On Thu, 3 May 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Perhaps you can add a new helper > (platform_device_register_simple_dma()?) that takes the DMA mask, too?
Would there be enough potential callers in future to justify that API? It seems that there haven't been many in the past. I found four users of platform_device_register_simple() which might benefit. Mostly these call dma_set_coherent_mask() in the platform driver probe routine.
drivers/gpu/drm/etnaviv/etnaviv_drv.c drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/omap_drv.c drivers/parport/parport_pc.c
(Am I missing any others?)
To actually hoist the dma mask setup out of existing platform drivers would have implications for every device that matches with those drivers.
That's a bit risky since I can't test those devices -- that's assuming I could identify them all; sometimes platform device matching is not well defined at build time (see loongson_sysconf.ecname).
So far, it looks like macmace and macsonic would be the only callers of this new API call.
What's worse, if you do pass a dma_mask in struct platform_device_info, you end up with this problem in platform_device_register_full():
if (pdevinfo->dma_mask) { /* * This memory isn't freed when the device is put, * I don't have a nice idea for that though. Conceptually * dma_mask in struct device should not be a pointer. * See http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.pci/9081 */ pdev->dev.dma_mask = kmalloc(sizeof(*pdev->dev.dma_mask), GFP_KERNEL);
Most of the platform drivers that call dma_coerce_mask_and_coherent() are using pdev->of_match_table, not platform_device_register_simple(). Many of them have a comment like this:
/* * Right now device-tree probed devices don't get dma_mask set. * Since shared usb code relies on it, set it here for now. * Once we have dma capability bindings this can go away. */
> With people setting the mask to kill the WARNING splat, this may become > more common.
Since the commit which introduced the WARNING, only commits f61e64310b75 ("m68k: set dma and coherent masks for platform FEC ethernets") and 7bcfab202ca7 ("powerpc/macio: set a proper dma_coherent_mask") seem to be aimed at squelching that WARNING.
(Am I missing any others?)
So far, this is not looking like a common problem, and I'm having trouble finding some way to improve on my original patches.
--
| |